I have been holding off on building a new system until the release of Bulldozer so I can make my final decision based upon actual comparative data between AMD's newest release and the Intel offerings. But until we know actual benchmarks from released Bulldozer chips it is impossible to say. My guess is it might meet and possibly even surpass 2500 but not the i7 2600.

I have been holding off on building a new system until the release of Bulldozer so I can make my final decision based upon actual comparative data between AMD's newest release and the Intel offerings. But until we know actual benchmarks from released Bulldozer chips it is impossible to say. My guess is it might meet and possibly even surpass 2500 but not the i7 2600.

Click to expand...

This is going to be a pointless thread seeing as how nobody really has any real concrete information on Bulldozer.

But I'm going with the general consensus is that it might not live up to the i7 2600k if even the i5 2500k.

Nonetheless, I think they will still meet the "bang for your buck" criteria they always have.

AMD's cpu's are "bang for your buck." because they have to be. This isn't some company that actually cares about how much money you save. They want to make money too. They just haven't had the product line to charge more for their cpu's. I'm tired of hearing "bulldozer." What is it 3-4 years now? Really would like to jump ship to amd at their prices, but I'm not that broke yet

AMD's cpu's are "bang for your buck." because they have to be. This isn't some company that actually cares about how much money you save. They want to make money too. They just haven't had the product line to charge more for their cpu's. I'm tired of hearing "bulldozer." What is it 3-4 years now? Really would like to jump ship to amd at their prices, but I'm not that broke yet

Click to expand...

you are right , the only advantage for amd is that you can have a good cpu at an affordable price

you are right , the only advantage for amd is that you can have a good cpu at affordable price

Click to expand...

And what is the 2500K (or the other i5/i3 SKU's) ? I'd have to say a better CPU at (an) affordable price - CPU and platform.

Anyhow, there's a likelihood that that 8150 will beat 2600K in a handful of gaming benchmarks (BF3 for example) based solely on core/thread count or base frequency (speed). In this example -BF3- Bulldozer would have to perform worse than Phenom II X6 whilst clocking higher and having two more available threads not to beat the 2600K

Whether or not Bulldozer can live with the 2500K/2600K consistantly, or on a clock-for-clock, price/performance, performance/watt basis then I'm going with NO.

It looks like what the poll is asking, is whether BD will be a "success".

In the end, it doesn't really matter a great deal. AMD will still sell BD to a few diehards/fanboys even if it tanks - their excuses are ready to to penned/typed (benchmarks favour Intel µarch/use Intel compile...just using BD as a placeholder for Piledriver...buying to keep competition alive....user performance level required = BD, anything above is superfluous....it o/c's to 8.4 on LN2/LHe, BD kicks a5s in [insert heavily MT content creation app])

What will determine BD's overall success is the perception given by OEM's, since the vast number of computer buyers purchase pre-builts.
If Cyberpower, Alienware, iBuypower et al market premium BD based systems at or above Sandy Bridge level ( price, feature set, liquid cooling etc.) then that will translate into "success".

Once the dust settles and benchmarks are in, it will be of greater interest to a few people (myself included) whether AMD have been straight-up with their information "leaks" and PR/marketing tactics via web forums, or whether BD represents a concentrated fud/outright bs campaign by AMD employees. I dare say that Zambesi and Interlagos (BD server) benchmarks will be of keen interest to many who have been carpet-bombed by AMD's PR machine for voicing their reservations on the Bulldozer architectures capabilities and AMD's performance claims.

Given the fact that AMD is already hyping Piledriver I'm not overly optimistic that BD is going to hang with the 2600K except for multi-threaded applications. They were quick to release the news on the 8GHz LN2 overclock (two cores) but haven't been forthcoming with how well it does firing on all eight with conventional cooling solutions ... not a good sign.

"No cooling in my kit... Got mail today that apparently Corsair is sending some 2 X4 GB dimms to the current reviewers (2000c9) However dunno if I still have the kit here when the rams arrive lol AMD in fact gave me one day at start, I begged on the phone to keep it over the weekend" - Leeghoofd (xtremesystems.org forum)

"are you saying AMD at first wanted you to review it and send it back the next day?" -radaja (post #3706)

"Not many samples in Benelux* region mate, same for motherboards, GPUs etc... this time we got the cpu first, usually we are 5th in line..." -Leeghoofd

"Looks like the platform is not ready, with last minute changes being made.
Dont think we are going to see what this architecture can really do, until a few months after launch.
My prediction is that we could see up to 20% performance increase in certain applications with bios updates and OS updates.
This is just my gut feeling...." (Leeghoofd post at xs - yanked presumeably due to NDA restrictions)

Click to expand...

Also noted that AMD seem to be shipping 8150 near exclusively to reviewers -so anyone looking for the value end of the series 8120, 6100 and 4170 is likely out of luck

as far as this specific poll goes, I think they made gaming and working with the GPU subsystem a priority, so I suspects it will be as good or better overall as the 2600k for games. As far as overall performance i would not dare to hazard a guess. I have seen many releases over the years and this one is just bizarre. Its the most contentious I have ever seen, which bodes well that they are on to something...it has been delayed time after time , which doesn't...Intel is cherry picking i2700K to release at the same time which may be because BD is uncomfortably in 2600K performance territory, but then the price placement does not look good as competition for the 2600K...etc...etc
At this point I would not be surprised to see another delay, or paper launch with retail availability showing up as C2 or something. While taking guesses at what it will score on what bench is useless IMO. I think they took an extremely ambitious " leaving when the rollercoaster is full" approach with the elaborate branch prediction and asymetrical caching, and now it's a matter of if they can get it to work. An all or none proposition as it were.
It is going to be extremely amusing to watch. yesterday I noticed the very same loudmouth on the boards that said that "it's not 8 real cores!...it's just hyper-threading!" now say " 8 cores and it cant beat Intels 4!) how he knows this , I have no idea.
At any rate, I am intrigued by the architecture. Good bad or indifferent, I am going to grab one when they are available and make up my own mind.

At any rate, I am intrigued by the architecture. Good bad or indifferent, I am going to grab one when they are available and make up my own mind.

Click to expand...

GL with the beta testing. From the sounds of it, AMD shipped Crosshair V boards with the review kits - 3 or 4 (possibly more) BIOS released in the last few days kind of points towards an unfinished product.....maybe AMD could go with FX-Crysis 2 Edition

As far as overall performance i would not dare to hazard a guess. I have seen many releases over the years and this one is just bizarre.

Click to expand...

Barcelona 2.0
At least the performance should be ballpark current spec (2500K/2600K). I still think BD is coming out of the stove underdone. Then it becomes a toss-up whether it's better to delay (again) or release a buggy product. A lot will depend upon whether AMD are "guiding" reviewers to use certain benchmarks. Cinebench seems to be causing no end of problems for the CPU and subsystem if leaks are to be believed.

Its the most contentious I have ever seen, which bodes well that they are on to something...

Click to expand...

...or scrambling for the lifeboats.
Remember the hurried HD 6970/6950 launch and the botched drivers ? Didn't aid AMD in reviews, and sure took a while for those less than positive effects to dissipate.

Unlikely.
1. Any 2600K (esp D1/D2 step) would suffice. There wouldn't be a 2600K made that couldn't sustain a 100MHz bump in core while retaining the stock VID range.
2. Intel have probably been stockpiling CPU's that couldn't make the Xeon E3-1280 grade since March.

which may be because BD is uncomfortably in 2600K performance territory, but then the price placement does not look good as competition for the 2600K...etc...etc

Click to expand...

2600/2600K/2500/2500K are relatively low volume parts. I can't believe that Intel couldn't drop prices on them at a whim if needed. Somehow I doubt knocking 20% off retail is going to seriously hurt their bottom line.
As a general rule, Intel doesn't react to AMD's pricing. Intel reacts to it's own inventory stocks and timelines. Llano probably represents a bigger threat to Intels market domination...at least it would if they could actually get enough of them into the channel (the top binned parts, not the salvage bins)

It is going to be extremely amusing to watch. yesterday I noticed the very same loudmouth on the boards that said that "it's not 8 real cores!...it's just hyper-threading!" now say " 8 cores and it cant beat Intels 4!) how he knows this , I have no idea.

Click to expand...

AMD say 8 cores/4 modules - they made it, thats what it is. chew* (the guy that clocked the 8.4G world record) says it acts more more a quad with hyperthreading.
Eight cores sounds cool for marketing...it doesn't sound so cool if it's battling the slide-deck war with quads. AMD are already on record as saying that the second core in a modules gives ~80% of the first cores performance (due to shared resources) as opposed to Intel's HT which give the hyperthread ~30% of the performance of an "actual" core...so, it's technically more of a "core" than not- and that's not even taking into account the architecture layout.

Which ever way it's marketed, look for AMD's PR/Marketing to botch the sales pitch.SOP.

And what is the 2500K (or the other i5/i3 SKU's) ? I'd have to say a better CPU at (an) affordable price - CPU and platform.
.

Click to expand...

firstly, sorry for my Misspelled, that happened because my native Language is not English.
secondly , i am not comparing the i7 k series with the current amd phenom cpus , i meant that when AMD bulldozer arrives it will be a better choice (price vs performance) than i5 2500k and i7 2600k

I don't believe we know a hell of a lot about Bulldozer in those categories.

Click to expand...

you are right about that, we don't have an accurate information about amd bulldozer performance, i make this pull just to know what techspot members think about the the perfomance of the upcoming amd cpus

GL with the beta testing. From the sounds of it, AMD shipped Crosshair V boards with the review kits - 3 or 4 (possibly more) BIOS released in the last few days kind of points towards an unfinished product.....maybe AMD could go with FX-Crysis 2 Edition

Click to expand...

:haha: you mispelled crisis though

Personally I don't think there will be a lot in it either. A few fps here or there makes no difference in the context of the variety of GPU's in circulation

Click to expand...

Watch if Cf doesn't improve...just a hunch.

Barcelona 2.0
At least the performance should be ballpark current spec (2500K/2600K). I still think BD is coming out of the stove underdone. Then it becomes a toss-up whether it's better to delay (again) or release a buggy product. A lot will depend upon whether AMD are "guiding" reviewers to use certain benchmarks. Cinebench seems to be causing no end of problems for the CPU and subsystem if leaks are to be believed.

Click to expand...

i forgot about that! i have seen the cinebench thing, not sure what to make of it.

Unlikely.
1. Any 2600K (esp D1/D2 step) would suffice. There wouldn't be a 2600K made that couldn't sustain a 100MHz bump in core while retaining the stock VID range.
2. Intel have probably been stockpiling CPU's that couldn't make the Xeon E3-1280 grade since March.

Click to expand...

..without a doubt, and then some. i mean the timing and the framing of the release as "5.0Ghz on air" could be a 'one-up' if BD is in 2600K territory.

From my previous post:
. I think they took an extremely ambitious " leaving when the rollercoaster is full" approach with the elaborate branch prediction and asymetrical caching, and now it's a matter of if they can get it to work. An all or none proposition as it were.

Click to expand...

Can they get it to work?

Which ever way it's marketed, look for AMD's PR/Marketing to botch the sales pitch.SOP.

Click to expand...

,,they already have. If the worst of this is true, after three years, why not just wait another 3-5 months for piledriver/Vishera/Volan?

Possible. CF scaling is already pretty good. Don't know if that would be a great trade off for most games that use 1 or 2 threads - as it is, Phenom II gets taken out to the woodshed by Core i3/i5 in a lot of games - and if BD's single-threaded performance is equal (or god forbid, less) than Phenom II then things will start to look mighty embarrassing.

..without a doubt, and then some. I mean the timing and the framing of the release as "5.0Ghz on air" could be a 'one-up' if BD is in 2600K territory.

Click to expand...

Again, possible. Every man+dog knows how SB scales on OC. What might not be apparent is how fast Intel seem to have refined the product. I've built and OC'ed a lot of 2500K/2600K systems in the last 6 months. D0 step (ES) are all over the place (VID and OC potential), maybe one in four/five will get to 5GHz comfortably (<1.4v vCore)....D2's I'd say one in three/four- and almost all will do 4.9/5.0 at ~1.4-1.43v. At this stage, the motherboard is likely to be much more of a limiting factor than the CPU.

The other side of the coin of course would be that AMD can market BD as being "5G capable on air" all they like, but a few salient details are are still front and centre:
1. Not every chip will be 5G capable (you wouldn't think)
2. 5GHz capable doesn't mean that AMD are warrantying the chips if they are run at that speed (or more to the point- voltage requirement)
3. Like P67/Z68, OC is largely going to come down to board build quality.
4.Most people either don't overclock, or rely on stock performance as a baseline guage- especially in this day and age where you have multiple choice on saved BIOS profiles and instant OC software/hardware.

Again, possible. Every man+dog knows how SB scales on OC. What might not be apparent is how fast Intel seem to have refined the product. I've built and OC'ed a lot of 2500K/2600K systems in the last 6 months. D0 step (ES) are all over the place (VID and OC potential), D1's -maybe one in four/five will get to 5GHz comfortably (<1.4v vCore)....D2's I'd say one in three/four- and almost all will do 4.9/5.0 at ~1.4-1.43v. At this stage, the motherboard is likely to be much more of a limiting factor than the CPU.

The other side of the coin of course would be that AMD can market BD as being "5G capable on air" all they like, but a few salient details are are still front and centre:
1. Not every chip will be 5G capable (you wouldn't think)
2. 5GHz capable doesn't mean that AMD are warrantying the chips if they are run at that speed (or more to the point- voltage requirement)
3. Like P67/Z68, OC is largely going to come down to board build quality.

Click to expand...

Not only that, but if the architectural sheets are correct, this is a 'netburst done correctly' and will require a higher frequency to hit its stride (thats where I came up with my 'plateau' theory. which better be correct because it probably not going to be able to compete in the frequency scaling dept. Hmmmm...I'm guessing 3.6Ghz for heavily threaded apps, and lets say...oh I don't know ...4.2 Ghz for lightly threaded/single threaded...:rolleyes:
now thats going out on a limb...:haha::suspiciou

***yes I know this is complete unfettered speculation....and i will probably buy one if it only hits PIII specs:haha:

3) Not sure why you would swear off a brand 'forever' because of a release. You realize that at one time for example Gigabyte was producing some real crap motherboards, now are amongst the best. It's all cyclical.